Modeling the Effects of Land Use Change on Soil Retention Ecosystem Services (Case Study: Lavasanat Watershed)

Motesharei, Marzie; Malekmohammadi, Bahram; Ramezani mehrian, Majid

doi:10.61186/jeer.15.3.59

year 15, Issue 3 (Autumn 2025) E.E.R. 2025, 15(3): 59-80 | Back to browse issues page

‎ 10.61186/jeer.15.3.59

Mendeley

Zotero

RefWorks

Motesharei M, Malekmohammadi B, Ramezani mehrian M. Modeling the Effects of Land Use Change on Soil Retention Ecosystem Services (Case Study: Lavasanat Watershed). E.E.R. 2025; 15 (3) :59-80
URL: http://magazine.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-900-en.html

Modeling the Effects of Land Use Change on Soil Retention Ecosystem Services (Case Study: Lavasanat Watershed)

Marzie Motesharei

, Bahram Malekmohammadi ^*

, Majid Ramezani mehrian

Department of Environmental Planning, Management, and Education, Faculty of Environment, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. , malekb@ut.ac.ir

Abstract: (1205 Views)

1- Introduction
Soil is a vital component of natural capital, providing essential ecosystem services such as flood regulation, habitat provision, carbon sequestration, and agricultural production. As awareness of these services grows, soil retention has become a priority in environmental management. Key factors influencing soil retention and sediment control include changes in land use and land cover. This study aims to monitor land use and land cover changes in the Lavasanat watershed from 2000 to 2023 and assess their impact on soil-related ecosystem services. The Lavasanat watershed is crucial for managing water and soil resources due to its location upstream of the Latian Dam and its proximity to protected areas and national parks.
2- Materials and Methods
Landsat satellite imagery from 2000 and 2023 was used to assess changes in land use and land cover, as well as their impacts on ecosystem services. Land-use classification maps were created using eCognition Developer 9.01 and incorporated into the InVEST-SDR model. The inputs for this analysis included the rainfall factor (R), soil erodibility (K), vegetation cover (C), protective measures (P), a Digital Elevation Model (DEM), a biophysical table, and the land-use maps. Additionally, the Geographically Weighted Regression (GWR) model was applied to examine the spatial relationships between land-use changes and ecosystem service indices, specifically focusing on Avoiding Erosion and Avoiding Export.
3- Results
The study revealed that green cover—including rangelands, coniferous forests, orchards, and agricultural lands—declined by approximately 152 square kilometers (15.4 percent), leading to a conversion of these areas into built-up land. This transformation resulted in a 56.14 percent increase in potential soil loss, a 10.32 percent reduction in the Avoid Erosion index, and a 23.31 percent rise in the Avoid Export index. The Geographically Weighted Regression (GWR) model demonstrated a strong spatial correlation between land use and ecosystem services related to Avoid Erosion and Avoid Export in both 2000 and 2023. In 2000, the Adjusted R² values were 0.98 for Avoid Erosion and 0.99 for Avoid Export, with lower residual sums of squares and standard deviations compared to 2023. Rangelands exhibited the highest Avoid Erosion and the lowest Avoid Export, while built-up areas showed the highest Avoid Export. In 2023, the Adjusted R² increased to 0.99 for Avoid Erosion but decreased to 0.96 for Avoid Export, accompanied by higher residual sums of squares and standard deviations. Orchards recorded the lowest Avoid Export, whereas coniferous forests had the highest. The decrease in the Akaike Information Criterion corrected (AICc) in 2023 indicated an enhanced model fit under more homogeneous spatial conditions. However, this improvement did not reflect ecological progress, as the reduction in natural cover and the expansion of built-up areas negatively impacted ecosystem performance in soil retention and erosion prevention. A comparison between 2000 and 2023 demonstrated a diminished capacity of the ecosystem to conserve soil, evidenced by a significant decline in Avoid Erosion and an increase in Avoid Export, driven by urban expansion and reduced vegetation cover. This underscores the urgent need for improved land-use management to mitigate soil degradation and preserve ecosystem functions.
4- Discussion & Conclusions
The findings highlight the importance of protecting vegetation cover and improving land-use management in sensitive areas. Changes in the Lavasanat watershed have led to decreased vegetation cover and an increase in built-up areas, negatively impacting ecosystem services such as soil retention and sediment control. As a result, soil erosion and excess sediment accumulation have worsened, reducing the ecosystem's resilience. Enhancing land-use management in areas with high erosion potential is crucial. Additionally, integrating the InVEST model with advanced hydrological models like SWAT and RUSLE is recommended for more accurate simulations of soil erosion and ecosystem services. Future research should explore the effects of climate and socio-economic scenarios on soil erosion and land-use changes to better understand environmental change patterns and inform effective management strategies. These approaches can help improve planning for the preservation of soil and water resources, mitigating the harmful effects of climate change and human activities on ecosystems.

Keywords: Soil retention ecosystem services, Land use/land cover (LULC) changes, InVEST-SDR model, Geographically Weighted Regression (GWR), Lavasanat Watershed.

Full-Text [PDF 3217 kb] (171 Downloads)

Received: 2025/06/11 | Published: 2025/09/21

References

1. Adelisardou, F., Mederly, P., & Minikina, T. (2023). Assessment of soil- and water-related ecosystem services with coupling the factors of climate and land-use change (Example of the Nitra region, Slovakia). Environmental Geochemistry and Health, 45(8), 6605-6620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10653-023-01656-y [DOI:10.1007/s10653-023-01656-y.]

2. Anikwe, M. A. N., & Ife, K. (2023). The role of soil ecosystem services in the circular bioeconomy. Frontiers in Soil Science, 3. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoil.2023.1209100 [DOI:10.3389/fsoil.2023.1209100.]

3. Cadel, M., Cousin, I., & Therond, O. (2023). Relationships between soil ecosystem services in temperate annual field crops: A systematic review. Science of The Total Environment, 902, 165930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.165930 [DOI:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.165930.]

4. Carollo, F. G., Ferro, V., & Serio, M. A. (2018). Predicting rainfall erosivity by momentum and kinetic energy in Mediterranean environment. Journal of Hydrology, 560, 173-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.03.026 [DOI:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.03.026.]

5. Chamani, R., Mostafaee Yonjali, S., & Sadeghi, S. H. R. (2023). Role of Biological Measures in Soil Erosion Processes using InVEST Model in the Sharghong Watershed, South Khorasan, Iran. Journal of Water and Soil Resources Conservation, 13(2), 95-108. https://civilica.com/doc/1830825 (In Persian).

6. Chang, X., Chen, H., Li, J., Fei, X., Xu, H., & Xiao, R. (2024). Travel characteristics of urban residents based on taxi trajectories in China: Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, and Wuhan. Sustainability, 16(7), 2694. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16072694 [DOI:10.3390/su16072694.]

7. Chatterjee, S., Krishna, A.P., Sharma, A.P. (2013). Geospatial assessment of soil erosion vulnerability at watershed level in some sections of the Upper Subarnarekha river basin, Jharkhand, India. Environmental Earth Sciences, 71(1), 357-374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-013-2439-3 [DOI:10.1007/s12665-013-2439-3.]

8. da Gama, J. (2023). The role of soils in sustainability, climate change, and ecosystem services: challenges and opportunities. Ecologies, 4(3), 552-567. https://doi.org/10.3390/ecologies4030036 [DOI:10.3390/ecologies4030036.]

9. Deeb, M., Groffman, P. M., Blouin, M., Egendorf, S. P., Vergnes, A., Vasenev, V., Cao, D. L., Walsh, D., Morin, T., & Séré, G. (2020). Using constructed soils for green infrastructure - challenges and limitations. SOIL, 6(2), 413-434. https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-6-413-2020 [DOI:10.5194/soil-6-413-2020.]

10. Definiens. (2015). eCognition Developer 9.01 [Computer software]. Trimble. https://www.trimble.com.

11. Erfanian, M., Hosseinkhah, M., & Alijanpour, A. (2013). Introduction to Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) and Geographically Weighted Regression (GWR) Methods in Spatial Modeling of Land Use Effects on Water Quality. Extension and Development of Watershed Management, 1(1). (In Persian).

12. ESRI. (2021). ArcMap (Version 10.8.2) [Computer software]. Environmental Systems Research Institute. https://www.esri.com.

13. FAO & IIASA. (2023). Harmonized World Soil Database version 2.0. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. https://www.fao.org/soils-portal/data-hub/soil-maps-and-databases/harmonized-world-soil-database-v20/en.

14. FAO & IIASA. (2023 a). Harmonized World Soil Database version 2.0. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc3823en [DOI:10.4060/cc3823en.]

15. Filchev, L., & Kolev, V. (2023). Assessing of soil erosion risk through geoinformation sciences and remote sensing - a review. arXiv preprint arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.08430.

16. Gbodjo, Y. J. E., Ienco, D., Leroux, L., Interdonato, R., Gaetano, R., & Ndao, B. (2020). Object-based multi-temporal and multi-source land cover mapping leveraging hierarchical class relationships. Remote Sensing, 12(17), 2814. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12172814 [DOI:10.3390/rs12172814.]

17. Hermassi, T., El Ammami, H., & Ben, K. W. (2017). Impact of anthropogenic activities on erosive behavior of Nebhana Watershed, Tunisia. In M. Ouessar, Gabriels, D., Tsunekawa, A., Evett (Eds.), Water and land security in drylands (pp. 15-26). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54021-4_17 [DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-54021-4_17.]

18. Hou, D. (2023). Soil health and ecosystem services. Soil Use and Management. https://doi.org/10.1111/sum.12945 [DOI:10.1111/sum.12945.]

19. IRIMO. (2024). Annual precipitation data (1990-2023). Iran Meteorological Organization. https://www.irimo.ir.

20. Jahandari, J., Hejazi, R., Jozi, S. A., & Moradi, A. (2022). Application of InVEST water supply ecosystem service model to predict water erosion in Bandar Abbas Basin. Quarterly Journal of Environmental Erosion Research 12(4), 101-123. http://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.22517812.1401.12.4.5.6 (In Persian).

21. Li, N., Zhang, Y., Wang, T., Li, J., Yang, J. & Luo, M. (2022). Have anthropogenic factors mitigated or intensified soil erosion over the past three decades in South China? Journal of Environmental Management, 302, 114093. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.114093 [DOI:10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.114093.]

22. Marques, S. M., Campos, F.S., David, J., & Cabral, P. (2021). Modelling sediment retention services and soil erosion changes in Portugal: A spatio-temporal approach. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 10(4), 262. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10040262 [DOI:10.3390/ijgi10040262.]

23. MEA. (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Wetlands and Water Synthesis. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment.

24. Mwanga, E. W., Shaibu, A.-G., & Issaka, Z. (2024). Influence of long-term land use and land cover (LULC) changes on soil loss, sediment export, and deposition in the ungauged Bontanga watershed. H2Open Journal, 7(1), 93-113. https://doi.org/10.2166/h2oj.2024.088 [DOI:10.2166/h2oj.2024.088.]

25. Natural Capital Project. (2020). InVEST Data (Version 3.9) [Data set]. http://releases.naturalcapitalproject.org/?prefix=invest/3.9.0/data.

26. Natural Capital Project. (2023). InVEST (Version 3.14.1) [Computer software]. Natural Capital Project. https://naturalcapitalproject.stanford.edu/invest.

27. Renard, K. G., Foster, G. R., Weesies, G. A., McCool, D. K., & Yoder, D. C. (1997). Predicting soil erosion by water: A guide to conservation planning with the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE). United States Department of Agriculture.

28. Roose, E. (1977). Erosion et ruissellement en Afrique de l'Ouest, vingt années de mesures en parcelles expérimentales. ORSTOM.

29. Sadeghi, S. H., & Tavangar, S. (2015). Development of stational models for estimation of rainfall erosivity factor in different timescales. Natural Hazards, 77(1), 429-443. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-1608-y [DOI:10.1007/s11069-015-1608-y.]

30. Sharma, S., Kumar, A., & Pandey, A. (2023). Soil erosion in relation to land use/land cover change in the Dehar watershed, Himachal Himalaya, North India. Frontiers in Forests and Global Change, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/ffgc.2023.1124677 [DOI:10.3389/ffgc.2023.1124677.]

31. Sharp, R., Douglass, J., Wolny, S., Arkema, K., Bernhardt, J., Bierbower, W., Chaumont, N., Denu, D., Fisher, D., Glowinski, K., & Griffin, R. (2020). InVEST 3.8.7 User's Guide. The Natural Capital Project, Stanford University, University of Minnesota, The Nature Conservancy, and World Wildlife Fund.

32. Stoorvogel, J. J., & Mulder, V. L. (2021). A comparison, validation, and evaluation of the S-world global soil property database. Land, 10(5), 544. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10050544 [DOI:10.3390/land10050544.]

33. Sun, Y., Liu, D., & Wang, P. (2022). Urban simulation incorporating coordination relationships of multiple ecosystem services. Sustainable Cities and Society, 76(2), 103432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103432 [DOI:10.1016/j.scs.2021.103432.]

34. Tamire, C., Elias, E., & Argaw, M. (2022). Spatiotemporal dynamics of soil loss and sediment export in Upper Bilate River Catchment (UBRC), Central Rift Valley of Ethiopia. Heliyon, 8(11). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11220 [DOI:10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11220.]

35. USGS. (2014). Shuttle radar topography mission (SRTM) 1 arc-second global digital elevation model (DEM). United States Geological Survey. https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov.

36. USGS. (2022). Landsat Collection-2 Level-2 science products. https://www.usgs.gov/landsat-missions/landsat-collection-2-level-2-science-products.

37. Wischmeier, W. H., & Smith, D.D. (1978). Predicting rainfall erosion losses: A guide to conservation planning (Agricultural Handbook No. 537). United States Department of Agriculture.

38. WRM. (2023). Watersheds of Iran [Shapefile]. Water Resources Management of Iran. https://data.wrm.ir.

39. Yang, J., Zhai, D. L., Fang, Z., Alatalo, J. M., Yao, Z., Yang, W., Su, Y., Bai, Y., Zhao, G., & Xu, J. (2023). Changes in and driving forces of ecosystem services in tropical southwestern China. Ecological Indicators, 149, 110180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.110180 [DOI:10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.110180.]

40. Zabihi, M., Moradi, H. R., Khaledi Darvishan, A., & Gholamalifard, M. (2021). Application of InVEST ecosystem services model to prioritize sub-watersheds of Talar in terms of soil erosion, sediment retention and yield. Environmental Science and Water Engineering, 7(2), 293-303. [DOI:10.22034/jewe.2020.257980.1470 (In Persian).]